The body cam angle is interesting, and Believeraz makes a good point about the choice of words.

Local PD officers have the option of a camera that attaches to provided clear glasses, or their epaulet. The units they have keep a 30-second buffer, and once started, save the last 30 seconds. I'm wondering if there would a way to get a pressure switch in the holster such that the camera is automatically activated when the weapon is drawn. Or even make it magnetic. Either way, it shouldn't add any noticeable weight or draw time.

There's apparently a guy on a bike who saw part of the incident who has not yet come forward.

__________________This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.

I think, given the limited info released so far, that "body cameras not turned on yet" is more accurate. Typically they're turned on when someone gets out of the vehicle to approach a scene or make contact with someone.

Not to parse words too drastically, but I think the distinction bears notation. "Turned off" can denote a desire to hide something. They're not turned on 24/7. They get turned on under certain circumstances based on policy and law. I think we will know in time based on the investigation in this case at what time they were turned on (if they ever were) and whether the status of the cameras was consistent with the policy of the agency.

Your post makes no sense but if you're referring to probable cause that's been fleshed out by the courts pretty well at this point

My post makes sense if you're not an LEO.

It was about how any direction and sense it is for any LEO, who shot someone, to not answer any questions from any fellow LEO without the presence of a lawyer.

This is not that hard to understand. LEO's are trained via the 'academy,' and then again they're in the hip pocket of a senior training LEO to train them in the street, and they become the officer they are based on training and experience.

And then mistakes happen. An LEO shoots and kills someone by accident. Innocent civilians are killed at the hands of an LEO. I just ask if the mistake happens we don't cover the mistake under the guise of "you don't know what happened, let the facts be set forth, stop pretending facts not in evidence."

LEO's tend to side on the "you need to present facts" when they're in jeopardy.

Nobody's covering up anything. His partner has given a full accounting of what happened. The state agency is investigating. Nobody can compel Noor or whatever his name is to incriminate himself. He has the same rights as any other citizen accused of a crime. You'll note that no LEO here is defending him. What we are doing is stating the obvious, that however bad they appear, the facts as we know them are not necessarily the whole story and many, many times in the recent past the truth has been wildly different from the rampant speculation by people with an agenda. The fact that this probably isn't the case this time makes that no less true.

__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

LEO's tend to side on the "you need to present facts" when they're in jeopardy.

I know you're not an expert on police work but facts are pretty important when we're not in jeopardy too. It's sort of a bedrock principle.

__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

So, I am in Ohio, bored, have work to do, so I am gonna stir that shit a bit.

So what about when pookie and Yalalashondra are arrested for shooting someone(s), do they not enjoy the same degree of innocent until proven guilty? Are they afforded that same moral protection here as you demand for police officers in their position?

That said, for all of you guys that want to know about police investigations, get off your lazy ass and FOIA or whatever the municipal equivalent is, the information. No one has enough $ to do their mission cause we are too busy making criminals rich by paying them for their inconvenience or for not practicing their trade.

We all post here based on our experience. Just because 2-3 cops hurt your feelings doesn't mean they are all corrupt. Good cops doing their job is society and not news, ao you will never see it on the news. Likewise, just because your department prosecutes wrongdoers doesn't mean they all do.

So if you want to speak intelligently about the numbers of corrupt cops, do your fucking homework. Those of you that hold other cops accountable do so because you are honorable men, not because you are cops. Never forget that.

__________________
No one will take better care of us, than us: Suicide Hotline: 1-800-273-8255

It was about how any direction and sense it is for any LEO, who shot someone, to not answer any questions from any fellow LEO without the presence of a lawyer.

*snip*

And then mistakes happen. An LEO shoots and kills someone by accident. Innocent civilians are killed at the hands of an LEO. I just ask if the mistake happens we don't cover the mistake under the guise of "you don't know what happened, let the facts be set forth, stop pretending facts not in evidence."

LEO's tend to side on the "you need to present facts" when they're in jeopardy.

The first part- bear in mind when anyone (LEO or not) shoots and kills someone, the cold fact is they're now the suspect in a murder investigation. Legal counsel is the choice of anyone with a good head on their shoulders under those circumstances.

The second part- how dare we demand facts instead of blanket statements, assumption, and conjecture? In this case, for example: your posts have been a perfect example why we say "you don't know what happened, let the facts be set forth, stop pretending facts not in evidence." The irony is, you don't see it.

So what about when pookie and Yalalashondra are arrested for shooting someone(s), do they not enjoy the same degree of innocent until proven guilty? Are they afforded that same moral protection here as you demand for police officers in their position?

I'd like to address your question, but I'm not sure who you're asking or the context. Can you break it down for me a little bit?Shootings are a big piece of my caseload and I'd be happy to answer what I can.

So, I am in Ohio, bored, have work to do, so I am gonna stir that shit a bit.

So what about when pookie and Yalalashondra are arrested for shooting someone(s), do they not enjoy the same degree of innocent until proven guilty? Are they afforded that same moral protection here as you demand for police officers in their position?

I get what you're asking but I don't think it's a comparison of like and like. For one thing, 99% of the time they're guilty as hell and they shoot people for different reasons than cops do and under different circumstances. My opinions are also colored by my experience and right off the top of my head I know of several guys that have shot people both fatally and non fatally who have never been charged or were acquitted for bullshit reasons. It's not really the same thing.

__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

I know you're not an expert on police work but facts are pretty important when we're not in jeopardy too. It's sort of a bedrock principle.

As a citizen who doesn't have to carry a loaded weapon as an LEO or pretend to be an expert in jeopardy, the LEO's don't make me feel warm and fuzzy. I love LEO's from here until tomorrow but killing people because they've made a huge mistake isn't worth my time here tonight.

__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

This is not a dig on LEOs, just an observation. I have noticed that since most departments started requiring a college degree that there was a shift in the type/personality of a large amount of officers. They seem to have more book/analytical smarts as opposed to common sense/street smarts.
Many lack the ability to read people and respond in a way to deescalte a situation. Many now believe that if they give someone an order, whatever that order might be, you are required to obey them without question. Lastly I notice that many officers are very apprehensive/afraid to go hands on with a suspect and instead draw their weapon, leaving little options should the situation escalate.

Again I am not painting all officers with that brush. There are many great ones that I have worked with. But as much as the good officers try and mold the younger officers their are some skills that can't be taught.

^^^ Serious lack of people skills nowadays. Not just LE. I don't know how that can be overcome?

It's a definite problem in the workforce writ large, and we are impacted a lot more than many sectors. Interaction via digital device over face-to-face, everyone-gets-a-trophy, and a lack of focus on solving your own problems in today's youth are causing havoc via unintended consequences in the labor force. There are seminars and training events focused on training and supervising millenials in law enforcement, because how it's "always been" isn't working.

This is not a dig on LEOs, just an observation. I have noticed that since most departments started requiring a college degree that there was a shift in the type/personality of a large amount of officers. They seem to have more book/analytical smarts as opposed to common sense/street smarts.
Many lack the ability to read people and respond in a way to deescalte a situation. Many now believe that if they give someone an order, whatever that order might be, you are required to obey them without question. Lastly I notice that many officers are very apprehensive/afraid to go hands on with a suspect and instead draw their weapon, leaving little options should the situation escalate.

Again I am not painting all officers with that brush. There are many great ones that I have worked with. But as much as the good officers try and mold the younger officers their are some skills that can't be taught.

That isn't a dig in any way, Brother! It's a very accurate observation. Our agency tried that for a couple of years. It was a dismal failure and we went back to our older methods of selection which turned things back around for the better.

Why is that? The public should hear about ALL of them. Don't give your detractors a chance to paint it as you "sweeping it under the rug". Embarrassing as it might be, THAT kind of openness gives the public faith that the police will hold themselves accountable. To do the right thing is not enough, you must be SEEN to do the right thing. By the time Joe Citizen has seen "cop arrested" or "cop fired" to include perp walk a few times on TV, the idea that the police cover up misdeeds by their own will change. Discourages future misbehavior as well. No quiet resignation, just total ruination, the same as any citizen with the same charges.

I agree with that wholeheartedly and have said so many times on here. There is nothing that sends as strong a message as when a department says, "I clean my house and I keep it clean." I apply Big Boy rules to everyone else, and so, I likewise apply it to those I work with. As a result, I had a group that gave me the nickname -- CliqueKiller. I have called a lot of people out for a lot of things. It's a moniker I wear proudly

The body cam angle is interesting, and Believeraz makes a good point about the choice of words.

(snip) I'm wondering if there would a way to get a pressure switch in the holster such that the camera is automatically activated when the weapon is drawn. Or even make it magnetic. Either way, it shouldn't add any noticeable weight or draw time.

There is a weapon mounted camera that Viridian introduced at the National Sheriff's Association show this year that does just that. The camera is activated upon removal from the holster, and turned off when placed back into the holster. It mounts like a weapon light, and has a 500 lumen light capability as well.

I get what you're asking but I don't think it's a comparison of like and like. For one thing, 99% of the time they're guilty as hell and they shoot people for different reasons than cops do and under different circumstances. My opinions are also colored by my experience and right off the top of my head I know of several guys that have shot people both fatally and non fatally who have never been charged or were acquitted for bullshit reasons. It's not really the same thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Believeraz

I'd like to address your question, but I'm not sure who you're asking or the context. Can you break it down for me a little bit?Shootings are a big piece of my caseload and I'd be happy to answer what I can.

You are way out in front of my question. Should Devondeshawn and Pookie get the same protection, let's say of their reputation as do police officers involved in ANY criminal act. Granted, pookie is a shit stain but is he still not innocent until proven guilty (again?) The constitution governs us all equally. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of our peers. Do we offer pookie the same consideration? You guys have to do it on the street, why not here?

Also, I should have posted my OP in the FBI thread, but it still applies here.

__________________
No one will take better care of us, than us: Suicide Hotline: 1-800-273-8255